Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Will you be taking a booster?

Options
1495052545568

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    I didn't calculate them myself, I took them from a post I happened to have open when I saw your post earlier. I can't remember whether it was a forum or a social media site or what now. Sorry!

    I'm sure you'll make whatever decision you think is best, anyway. Good luck with it. All the chances of negatives whatever the decision are very very small, at least.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    The link to the study doesn't give timeframes from what I can see? This also appears to be an early enough study. The vaccines all showed a strong efficacy against serious illness and death and were/are livesavers. Zero doubts there.

    They do go on to say they don't know how long protection lasts. It seems as far as symptomatic infection goes it lasts a few months going by the booster programmes rolled out, even before omicron came along. Immune memory protection seems to last much longer(save for the old and immunosuppressed) so that's a major positive.

    As for transmissibility: The impact of vaccination with Comirnaty on the spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in the community is not yet known. It is not yet known how much vaccinated people may still be able to carry and spread the virus.

    What's also notable is how few of the unvaccinated in that trial came down with symptomatic covid 19. They give no indication about postive/negative status which doesn't help.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 31,084 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Sure, I'm really just addressing that regular discussion point which comes up concerning whether "we were told" originally that vaccines prevented infection, symptomatic infection or severe disease, and the original approval seemed like a sensible place to look.

    I think there has been criticism on here before about the lack of random PCR testing in the clinical trials, but for good or bad, they were focused on symptomatic infection, which seems OK to me.

    From what I recall the conversation shifted from symptomatic infection to serious disease once Delta came out, because the efficacy against symptomatic infection dropped, although bearing in mind how people actually behave outside a double-blind clinical trial ("I'm vaccinated, so I'm safe" has been a common sentiment) I think the vaccines were holding up well in suppressing infection before Omicron came along.



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    Perhaps not in Ireland, but there certainly are plenty of examples of "official" types saying that the injections prevent the spread of Covid. Which, given the global nature of info, would have an impact on the perceptions of Irish people. There's no reason for people here to think the mRNA injections would behave differently in Irish people than, say, American people.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 31,084 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    But they do prevent spread (or did prior to Omicron). How else would a virus with an R0 of 5-8 result in a flat reproduction rate in a largely open society with low levels of prior infection?



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    Sorry, I wasn't clear. 'Twas a late night lol.

    There are plenty of examples of "official" types saying, very clearly, that injected people WILL NOT get the virus and WILL NOT pass it on.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    Oh sure, what I mean is - and I have to restate this for the hard of reading out there(not you) the vaccines worked and are extremely protective against serious illness - the numbers in that particular study mean pretty much feck all if we don't know the exposure status of the participants. IE the placebo group could simply have not had the same levels of exposure to the virus as the vaccinated group. They seem to acknowledge that wriggle room in their quite wide percentages in real world efficacy: This means that, in this study, the vaccine was 90.7% effective at preventing symptomatic COVID-19 (although the true rate could be between 67.7% and 98.3%).

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Registered Users Posts: 31,084 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    But it's a double-blind randomised trial, so why would you expect the exposure to be significantly different?

    I'm no statistician, but I suspect the wide confidence intervals are purely a consequence of small numbers of symptomatic cases.

    The real (and unavoidable) limitation of the trials was the short duration before approval was applied for, but it's a pandemic so understandable that the vaccines were approved as soon as they were shown to be safe and effective in the short term.

    Relatedly I've been thinking about starting a thread on "things I believed which proved to be false" but I'm not sure it would go well. :-)



  • Registered Users Posts: 31,084 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    Yeah, that was unfortunate (was it Micheál Martin and Luke O'Neill?). But for me it the jabbering from politicians and commentators makes no difference to the underlying truths which I seek to inform my behaviour and decisions.

    I got a booster because I wanted maximum protection, not because Micheál Martin told me to.



  • Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 60,159 Mod ✭✭✭✭Wibbs


    But it's a double-blind randomised trial, so why would you expect the exposure to be significantly different?

    The double blind part just means neither the subjects nor the people doing the vaccinations knew which was the real deal or not, so that wouldn't have an effect on the numbers in that sense. The vaccines certainly showed a positive response and one which has been borne out in real world terms as far as deaths among the vulnerable groups go(who would show the biggest effect), but in that study in particular the numbers themselves were tiny and we have no breakdown of positives versus negatives to show exposure. Given over 30% of positives are asymptomatic without vaccines it's a knotty enough problem. It's another reason why I waited a few months before getting vaccinated(and I'd already had covid so had much more breathing room to do so. If I'd been 65 or over I'd have jumped at them) until the harder stats were in and the percipitous drop in elderly people ending up in hospital showed those real world numbers.

    Rejoice in the awareness of feeling stupid, for that’s how you end up learning new things. If you’re not aware you’re stupid, you probably are.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    Yeah, but the thing that gets said often (not by you, but by some very cock-sure individuals on this forum) is that NOBODY EVER said the injections would stop you getting covid or passing it on. Which is a demonstrably false, gaslight-y statement.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 31,084 ✭✭✭✭Lumen


    The double blind part just means neither the subjects nor the people doing the vaccinations knew which was the real deal or not, so that wouldn't have an effect on the numbers in that sense

    I quibble a bit with "just". It's critical to understanding why clinical trial outcomes may not be matched in the real world.

    The randomised bit means that the participants are randomly distributed across vaxxed/unvaxxed cohorts, which ought to ensure no exposure bias from things like age (if you put all the old people in one group you would expect their exposure to be lower due to risk aversion). I guess smaller trials use matching to ensure fair distribution of certain attributes.

    The double blind bit is also critical to exposure because people who know they have received a vaccine would be expected to be less risk-averse

    The reality of vaccinations as I see it is that regardless of who said what, they have rightly allowed us to feel safer, and that promotes unsafe behaviour due to risk compensation. This is why the unvaxxed have some justification in blaming the vaxxed for putting them at risk.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,937 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    The thing to remember is that its important to look at what the actual science says. Most journalists have very little knowledge of the area's they report in. That goes for lots of things not just vaccines ie all science subjects, economic, law etc. Also when communicating a message you have to simplify things. A perfect example of that is our education system.

    The other thing is you its exceptionally rare to find a scientist that will give definite statements like "will not" especially in an area of ongoing study like Covid 19. So if you heard that it's safe to say at best the person claiming that was simplifying things.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,937 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    The reason people would be pro vaccine is because if you get a vaccine and booster you are going to ease the pressure on the health service. The thing to remember is we don't need a large percentage of the population to require hospital treatment at the same time before the system is overwhelmed.

    Also remember the vast vast majority of people even in the older age groups don't require hospital treatment as a result of Covid. High risk is a relative term. I think in Feb 20(before wide spread vaccination) only 1 in 5 of over 65s who had a confirmed case needed hospital treatment. Or put it another way 80% didn't and that's ignoring asymptomatic people so the actual % of over 65s requiring hospital treatment was even lower.

    However even if .1% (5,000)of the country require hospital treatment at the same time the health service is put under massive pressure. The purpose of vaccines is to limit the number of people who require hospital treatment to manageable levels. Vaccines work on a societal level if enough people get infected it will inevitably increase hospitalisations. Vaccines and associated boosters enable us to reach a form of herd immunity in a safe manner (ie no large influx of patients into hospital at the same time)

    Having to take boosters is not unusual. We have it with the flu every year and a new flu vaccine at that. I don't see any widespread conspiracy theory associated with the flu vaccine even though its new (to adapt for the particular strain)every year.



  • Registered Users Posts: 188 ✭✭glut22


    If there is a comparatively low uptake for the booster (compared to the first two) among the under 40s what will happen to the domestic covid pass?



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden and CDC director Rochelle Walensky, to name a few, have all said at one time or another that you "will not" get covid if you're double vaccinated.

    And while, sure, simplifying things for explanation's sakes is a thing, outright lying in order to get someone to do something you want them to do is a bit different from that.

    My point was and remains that "nobody has ever said" mRNA injections is just not true.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    I'm not sure how this has anything whatsoever to do with the post you quoted?

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    Anthony Fauci, Joe Biden and CDC director Rochelle Walensky, to name a few, have all said at one time or another that you "will not" get covid if you're double vaccinated.

    Links?



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    There's plenty of video compilations floating about that are not difficult to find. You'll trust sources you find yourself more than any posted by someone else.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,570 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    You said it is “demonstrably false”, so demonstrate it.

    Links please.



  • Advertisement
  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I found this for Biden and this for Walensky. Are they what you are referring to? Can you link to a Fauci one?



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,570 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    A slip by Joe Biden and a report on a clip taken out of context, surely not.



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    I just had a quick look at that poster's post history and I am guessing that yes, this is another attempt to spread misinformation.



  • Registered Users Posts: 1,937 ✭✭✭PeadarCo


    You were referring to people on this forum being pro vaccine and from my point of view being critical of that. I was explaining why people would be pro vaccine and pro booster.



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    I wasn't referring to people being pro-vaccine. I was referring to people who said that "nobody has ever" said that mRNA injections stop people getting infected and passing on SARS-CoV-2.

    I understand why people are pro-mRNA injections and more power to them.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,570 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    And so far you haven’t demonstrated what you said is “demonstrably false”.



  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    Presented with evidence that Joe Biden did indeed say that "you're not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations", which demonstrates that the assertion that "nobody ever said" that they prevent transmission/infection is false, you called it "a slip" and breezed right on by, squawking about me not demonstrating the thing you had just dismissed demonstration of.

    There is no evidence I could present that would satisfy you and I'm not particularly invested in your personal beliefs either way, so I'm not going to engage any further.

    Happy New Year.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



  • Posts: 0 [Deleted User]


    You are aware that by not responding, you are acknowledging that you're spreading misinformation right?



  • Registered Users Posts: 14,570 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    Are you claiming that the President of the US thinks Covid vaccines gives immunity from infection? I put it to you that at a town hall he had a momentary lapse, something which has happened a few times since his election. That most certainly is not to say he is telling us what you claim.

    There is evidence you can present, follow through on your claim that Fauci said you cannot get Covid if you are vaccinated.



  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 849 ✭✭✭MilkyToast


    I'm aware that you think that, and I'm comfortable with it.

    You already posted proof of Biden saying "you're not going to get Covid if you have these vaccinations" and of Walensky saying "our data from the CDC today suggests that vaccinated people do not carry the virus, don't get sick, and that it's not just in the clinical trials, but it's also in real-world data."

    This meets the criteria of demonstrating that "nobody has ever said that vaccines prevent transmission" is untrue, which was my claim.

    Anyone desperate to see other examples of people claiming the vaccines prevent transmission can do the legwork themselves. There are plenty out there.

    “Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience." ~C.S. Lewis



Advertisement